relationships between resource governance and resource conflict

RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN 

RESOURCE GOVERNANCE AND 

RESOURCE CONFLICT: 

NEPALESE EXPERIENCES 

Bishnu Raj Upreti 

1. Introduction 

In this paper I am attempting to highlight the relationship between resource 

governance, resource scarcity, and conflict in Nepal. The notion of resource 

governance is discussed to address environmental problems such as scarcity of 

natural resources and environmental services. Environmental governance, in this 

paper, refers to a principle, process and practices of mainstreaming environmental 

and ecological issues and concerns in policies, plans, laws and regulations, 

strategies, decisions and actual actions at different levels (Including the national 

level) within a good governance framework. This framework is consensus 

oriented, participatory, guided by the rule of law, effective and efficient, 

accountable and transparent, responsive, equitable and inclusive. 

Conflict in this paper refers to observable differences in opinion, 

misunderstandings, clashes of interest, disagreements, complaints in public, 

protests by argument and physical assault, antipathy, and filing of cases with the 

local administration, police and courts (Upreti 2002). When the latitude of 

tolerance crosses the bottom line then conflict occurs. Feelings of unfairness, 

suspicion, injustice, mistrust and suchlike ultimately lead to conflict. Resource 

conflicts produce both positive and negative consequences and alter existing social 

relations (Buckels 1999). They induce change in resource management and 

utilisation, policy process, livelihood strategies, land and agriculture, gender 

© Bishnu Raj Upreti – 2004 

- 71 -

RESOURCE GOVERNANCE AND RESOURCE CONFLICT IN NEPAL 


____________________________________________________________________ 

relations, power structures, and individual and collective behaviour. In most cases 

the combined effect of some or many of such factors can either escalate or resolve 

a conflict (Upreti 1999). 

The study of resource conflict involves investigating almost all aspects of human 

activity and interactivity ranging from the behaviour of individuals to group 

characteristics concerning governance of environmental services. Dominant 

thinking in conflict paradigms treats ‘environmental and resources conflict’ as a 

particular event in a particular point of time that needs to be resolved through legal 

and regulatory interventions. However, I perceive conflict as an inevitable process 

that can be used as a constructive means for social transformation and agrarian 

change. I prefer to use the term ‘conflict management’ instead of conflict 

resolution. Conflict management is making progress. On aspect of improving a 

conflict situation, progress may be developed in mutual gains, learning, achieving 

agreements, laying foundations for further negotiation or fully resolving conflict. 

Progress is a way of thinking about a conflict situation that recognises that conflict 

is inevitable and ongoing, and that management of the conflict comes from 

continual improvement in areas of substance and relationships (Daniels and Walker 

1997). It is not always possible to fully resolve all environmental and resources 

conflicts but it is possible to manage them. Conflict resolution implies that conflict 

is totally resolved. 

Conflict management basically focuses on negotiations about the use of resources. 

Conflict is also a source of learning 1 how to create opportunities for social change 

in society. When there is conflict it gives people opportunities to think, understand 

the causes of the problems, and look for solutions. Natural resource-conflict needs 

to be viewed in the wider context of historical, political, cultural, economic, 

institutional, organisational and technological dimensions that provide the basis for 

the creation, escalation, stalemate or management of conflicts. Therefore, resource 

conflict is interconnected with broader socio-political issues and their implications 

for environment, society and processes of agrarian change. 

Land, forest and water are the most important resources for the economic 

1 Learning is a complex activity, which manifests itself in a change in people’s 

behaviour. It is rooted in the human capacity to improve their understanding and 

skills on the basis of day-to-day experiences (Engel and Salomon 1997), external 

knowledge and surrounding environment. 

- 72 –

JOURNAL OF LEGAL PLURALISM 

2004 – nr. 50 

development of Nepal. Conflict is common in the use and management of these 

resources. Therefore, management of conflict is crucial to achieve sustainable use 

and management of natural resources (Upreti 1999, 2001). 

Box 1 

Positive and Negative Outcomes of Conflict 

Positive: Conflict can – 

• motivate people to try harder – to win 

• increase commitment, enhance group loyalty and spirit 

• increase clarity about the problem and raise awareness 

• lead to innovative breakthroughs and new approaches 

• clarify underlying problems and facilitate change 

• focus attention on basic issues and lead to solutions 

• increase energy level, making visible key values 

• sharpen approaches to agrarian reform and social change 

Negative: Conflict can – 

• lead to anger, avoidance, sniping, shouting, frustration, fear of failure, 

sense of personal inadequacy 

• suppress critical information 

• lower productivity by diverting effort to wasteful conflict 

• sidetrack careers, ruin relationships 

• disrupt patterns of work 

• consume money and time 

• escalate to violence, destroy social harmony, and lead to the collapse of 

society 

In the context of natural resources the perceived inconsistencies in the allocation 

between people of acquired rights and incurred obligations, or contradictions 

between two or more jurisdictions lead to conflict. In the legal sense conflict 

management is the application of the laws and regulations to ensure rights and 

provide remedies that reconcile the inconsistencies and decide which systems are 

to govern particular cases (Oli, 1998). 

- 73 –



____________________________________________________________________ 

2. Resource Scarcity as a Source of Present and Future Conflict 

A Report of the Johns Hopkins Population Information Programme (JHPIP) 

highlights that nearly half a billion people worldwide are currently facing water 

shortages (JHPIP 1998). By 2025 one in every three people will live in countries 

short of water. At present 31 countries are facing water stress or water scarcity 

and by 2025 the number will have exploded fivefold. The World Water Forum 

(2000) also stresses that more than one billion people in the world have no access 

to water of sufficient quantity and quality to meet even a minimum level of health, 

income, safety and freedom from drudgery. The World's projected total of 8 

billion people in 2025 will enormously increase pressure on natural resources and 

environmental services and may cause a catastrophe. The competition between 

industrial, urban, and agricultural use for natural resources is mounting and the 

per capita consumption of natural resources is increasing (JHPIP 1998). Regional 

conflicts over natural resources are brewing and could turn violent as shortages 

grow. In all continents and countries, people are already bickering over access to 

natural resources and competition for their use can be fiercer in the future. For 

example, serious conflicts are developing concerning large dams such as the 

Lesotho Highlands Water Project in the Malibamatso and Little Orange Rivers in 

Southern Africa funded by the World Bank. For such projects the World Bank is 

facing an onslaught of criticism not only over its support for big dams, but also for 

creating severe conflict in the host countries. As world water scarcity bites deeper 

into economies dependent on cheap water supplies, there is conflict over river 

catchments and lakes. Dams such as the Three Gorges Dam in China have become 

symbols of official tyranny, with whole cities being flooded and engineers being 

given free reign to resettle populations who are inconveniently living in river 

valleys (Ohlsson 1995). Because of the competition for available natural resources 

by an over-growing population, and resource capture by certain powerful people, 

the vital ecosystems on which humans and other species depend are severely 

threatened (World Water Forum 2000). The earth has lost 15% of its topsoil over 

the last 20 years through inappropriate agricultural practices. Water logging, 

salination and alkalisation affect another 1.5 million hectares of mostly irrigated 

agricultural land. Desertification and drought are severely limiting the production 

potential of the global agricultural system and posing several ecological challenges 2 

(Röling 2000). 

2 See Beck et al., (1994) for details about future risks, problems and challenges to 

modern societies. Also see Lubchenco (1998) for challenges to science to achieve 

sustainable future environmental management. 

- 74 –


2004 – nr. 50 

Conflict between Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan about the Nile with respect to 

flooding and water flow diversion, between Belgium and the Netherlands about the 

Maas and the Schelde with respect to salination and industrial pollution, between 

France, the Netherlands, Germany and Switzerland about the Rhine with respect to 

industrial pollution, between India and Bangladesh about the Brahmaputra and the 

Ganges with respect to siltation, flooding and water flow diversion, between 

Mexico and the USA about the Rio Grande and Colorado rivers with respect to 

salination, water flow and agrochemical pollution (Ohlsson 1995) are some 

examples to mention. Similarly, the conflicts such as those over the Amazonian, 

Borneo and Sumatran forests, the Massai forest, the Yellowstone National Parks, 

and also land disputes, 3 are all derived from political, economic or environmental 

motives. Internationally and domestically, the political wrangling and strife over 

natural resources are predicted to be one of the fundamental issues of the new 

millennium. 

Globalisation is increasingly posing new challenges and creating new conflicts in 

Nepal. For example, the conflict between Article 27.3b of the Trade Related 

Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) of the World Trade Organisation 

(WTO) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), increasing bio-piracy, 

uncertainties and threats caused by genetically modified organisms and terminator 

technology in the agricultural sector are all creating conflict. 

If there is scarcity of resources, there is competition, so natural resources will be a 

continuous source of future conflict. In this context a few sentences of the speech 

delivered by Fidel Castro on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the World 

Health Organisation is worth mentioning. 

The weather is changing, the seas and the atmosphere are heating 

up, the air and the water are polluted, the soil is eroding, the 

deserts are growing, the forest is disappearing, water is getting 

scarce. Who will save our species? The blind and uncontrollable 

3 The dispute between Israel and Palestine, the Kashmir land disputes, the grazing 

land dispute between the Tibetan autonomous region of China and Nepal, the 

Kalapani land dispute between Nepal and India, and land conflict between ethnic 

people and the white minority in Zimbabwe are just a few examples of land 

conflicts. 

- 75 –



____________________________________________________________________ 

laws of the market? Neo-liberal globalisation? .... (Idris, 1998: 

5). 

3. Governance of Nepalese Natural Resources and Conflict 

Population pressure, poverty, inequitable distribution and control, and bad 

governance are some of the root causes of conflict over natural resources and 

environment in Nepal. Land and forest resources are over-exploited because of 

heavy dependence of the ever-growing population (both human and animals). 

Resource scarcity is therefore directly linked with governance, accountability and 

transparency and a historically power-skewed socio-cultural legacy. 

Water is one of the most important natural resources of Nepal. It is estimated that 

there are a total of 6000 rivers (CBS 1995). Despite the vast amount of water 

available, drinking water is scarce in many parts of the country. Industrial use of 

water in urban centres has created competition and conflict in inter- and intrasectoral 

water use. Irrigation in mountain and hill regions, which constitute 83% 

of the Nepal’s total area, is difficult because of steep slopes and the fragile 

geography, which causes recurring landslides and soil erosion. The growing 

population requires more food and growing more food requires more water. 

Physiographic characteristics and climatic factors affect such consumptive use of 

water but they vary spatially and seasonally. This leads to an unequal distribution. 

Nepalese water resource management is therefore characterised by an unjust and 

insufficient use of water, by contradiction and by conflicts. Water scarcity, 

competition and conflict are common features of social, economic, political and 

legal issues in Nepal (Upreti 2002). 

Growing population, factories and farms all need more water and other natural 

resources. Competition between domestic consumption, industries, and farms is 

increasing and turning into disputes. Water pollution is another issue of conflict. 

We can see examples in Kathmandu Valley where the river systems are almost 

collapsing because the river-water is no longer useable. Conflict between the needs 

of populations living upstream of river basins and those dwelling downstream is 

mounting. Irrigation, a principal sector of water use in Nepal, intended to 

minimise the water scarcity in the field of agriculture, is creating its own conflicts 

and competition (Pradhan et al. 2000). 

Forests are another important natural resource for economic and social 

- 76 –


2004 – nr. 50 

development. Forest resources are one of the major resources directly contributing 

to the survival of rural people in Nepal. Forest resources directly fulfil forestrelated 

subsistence needs of women, poor and backward people as well as 

commercial needs of well-off people. They provide inputs for agriculture and 

livestock, and supply medicinal herbs, timber and non-timber forest products. 

Forests also support irrigation, conserve watersheds, improve the condition of the 

soil, provide recreation for tourists through forest-based ecotourism and national 

parks and wildlife reserves, provide a habitat for flora and fauna and provide raw 

materials for the forest-based industries (Upreti 1999). Many of the agricultural 

production systems of the country are based directly or indirectly on forest 

resources. However, the Nepalese forests are severely threatened by political and 

commercial interests. In 1964 forests covered more than 45% of the total area of 

the country, and this had declined to 29% by 1998. It is reported that the forest 

area of Terai is being destroyed at the rate of 1.3% per year (NPC 1998: 290). 

Smuggling of forest products is posing another serious challenge. The productivity 

of the forest sector is decreasing due to uncontrolled migration and encroachment, 

smuggling, illegal hunting, grazing, forest fires, lack of scientific forest 

management, and poor political commitments and bureaucratic performance. 

Deforestation is resulting in an increasing loss of habitats for birds, wild animals 

and reptiles. IUCN has reported that 24 species of mammals, 9 species of reptiles, 

27 species of birds, 2 species of insects and 13 species of plants have become 

endangered in Nepal (NPC 1998: 219). 

The land use systems in Nepal are rapidly changing because of increased 

environmental consumerism through the information revolution, technological 

advancement, market intervention and globalisation processes. As a consequence, 

over-exploitation of natural resources and environmental services is becoming 

harsh reality. The lack of strong environmental governance, weak institutional 

arrangements and rapid globalisation are exerting enormous pressures on natural 

resources. Well-planned land use is one of the most important aspects of 

environmental governance to achieve economic and social development. If land is 

managed and used properly, according to its quality, type, capacity and 

physiographic characteristics, not only the agricultural productivity and other 

social and economic benefits can be increased but also environmental risks can be 

minimised (Upreti 2003). 

Land is a crucial resource for the livelihood of Nepalese farmers. It is also a basis 

of feudalistic wealth and power. Due to the increasing human population and 

increasing numbers of unproductive livestock extreme pressure is being exerted on 

- 77 –



____________________________________________________________________ 

land resources (NPC 1998). Soil erosion, fertility decline, sedimentation and 

floods have degraded and continue to degrade the land. Causative factors of soil 

loss are steep slope cultivation, use of marginal land, overgrazing, forest fires, and 

population pressure. 

Internal migration is rapidly increasing the population in urban centres and putting 

additional pressure on the urban environment. More than 90% of urban centres are 

located in the fertile agricultural areas. Huge quantities of land are used annually 

in building construction by government, semi-government, nongovernment and the 

private sectors (NPC 1998). The increasing pace of rural to urban migration is 

reducing the productivity of land in both rural and urban areas (HMG/N 1992). 

The government is not able to develop mutual links between rural and urban areas 

nor to provide equal opportunities in the rural areas. The regional imbalance, lack 

of infrastructure and employment opportunities and the unavailability of basic 

service facilities are the triggering factors for migration from rural to urban areas 

(NPC 1998). Land encroachment and unplanned settlements are the result of such 

migration whereby an imbalanced situation develops between men and land 

resources. 

Skewed land distribution and gross disparities in land ownership are one of the 

major causes of poverty, injustice and social discrimination (Upreti 2000a). 

Because of such disparity, a large number of people have no access to productive 

land resources. More than 70% of farmers have less than one hectare of land 

(NPC 1998). Substantial regional variations in the distribution of agricultural lands 

exist in Nepal. The Terai Region occupies 17% of the total land area comprising 

49% of the total agricultural land whereas the Hill Region covers 63% of the total 

land and accounts for 40% of agricultural land. Mountain Region occupies 20% of 

the total land with 11% of agricultural land. The Human Development Report- 

Nepal 1998 shows that the bottom 40% of agricultural households use only 9% of 

the total agricultural land owning on average less than 0.5 ha. The top 6% 

occupies more than 33% of the total. These inequalities are manifested in the 

higher incidence of poverty and landlessness. Smallholders are marginalised and 

transformed into landless people (Shrestha 1997). This means that a few landlords 

control a huge fraction of the country’s land. The Nepalese land resource is 

besieged by multifarious problems such as duel ownership in land tenure, 

fragmentation, unequal distribution, institutional obstacles and unfocused 

government policies. Dual ownership is severely limiting productivity because 

- 78 –


2004 – nr. 50 

neither owner nor tenants invest in the land. 4 

Legal measures to implement land reform, to prevent land fragmentation, and to 

promote land consolidation are ineffective (Ghimire 1992; New Era 1988). 

Because of a lack of effective land-use planning, the agricultural sector is not able 

to reach its potential through specialisation and diversification. Erosion, landslides 

and floods in the Hill areas have seriously affected the river banks, the lower 

slopes of the Hills and the fertile land of the Terai region, and have had a negative 

impact on agriculture, irrigation, hydro-electricity, forest, bio-diversity, the 

environment, road systems, transport and tourism. 

Land management practices in Nepal are still insensitive to the negative effects on 

the wider environment, and become a source of conflict. For example, cultivation 

on the steep-slope land in the foothills of the Himalayas in Nepal is contributing to 

floods in the delta areas of Bangladesh (Tear Fund 1999). Buildings are rapidly 

covering highly fertile lands of the Terai region and urban centres as city centres 

expand. The land reform campaign, although initiated in 1951, has so far been 

merely a political slogan rather than significantly contributing to its reform. All 

major political parties have highlighted the land reform agenda in their election 

manifestos, but none of them are fulfilling their commitments. 

Despite the fact that the government, donors and local communities are investing 

much more effort, time and money in natural resource management, and despite 

the fact that several natural resource related offices have been established in all 

districts, environmental scarcity and conflicts are growing (Upreti 2004). My 

previous research findings show that conflicts are increasing through the 

intervention of external development organisations without a proper understanding 

of local systems, lack of user participation in natural resource management and 

defective policies (Upreti 2000a, b, c, 2002). Therefore it is time to rethink the 

dominant natural resource management approach in Nepal. Evidence is 

accumulating that, despite the efforts of the government, donors and NGOs, 

environmental problems and resource scarcity are mounting and leading to conflict 

and violence. 

Perhaps nobody would disagree that bad environmental governance has created 

4 

The Rural Credit Survey of Nepal Rastra Bank (1994) has indicated that 

investment in land improvement in Nepal is less than 3% of household income. 

- 79 –



____________________________________________________________________ 

resources scarcity leading to conflict. Resource degradation, conflict about access, 

rights and obligations, fair distribution, maintenance and benefit sharing were 

basically under-emphasised in governance practices in Nepal. Various endogenous 

and exogenous factors such as population growth, globalisation of markets, and 

environmental and technological changes are imposing new conflict on the natural 

resources sector. Many large and small natural resource management projects 

implemented by different agencies are introducing new conflicts as well as having 

various negative impacts on society. For example, ignorance of the importance of 

indigenous knowledge in planning and designing new systems, extortion, alteration 

of local rights and regulations, the replacement of old institutions by new ones, 

and the imposition of technocratic solutions are some of the immediate 

implications of the new interventions. These interventions have their own firmly 

fixed and uniform policy and a rigid procedure based on reductionist-positivist 

orientation. They are technocratic in nature and generally do not acknowledge 

local diversities. This is becoming one of the major causes of conflict in natural 

resource management. 

Conflict arises if the new natural resource management policy of the government 

conflicts with local cultural practice. The economic motive of people to acquire 

more from the existing natural resources on a competitive basis also leads to 

conflict. Conflict is also growing as a result of the contradiction between 

environmental and economic interests. Changes in historical use patterns of natural 

resource use can bring conflict into a community. Similarly, contradictions 

between legal arrangements and customary practices have promoted several 

conflicts. 

The social dimension of natural resource management is crucial in natural 

resource-related conflicts. The social dimension refers to the more human-related 

aspects of negotiations, such as knowledge, institutions of technology, and forums 

(platforms) (Röling 2000). In the study of conflict it is important to understand the 

role of the human dimension in respect of natural resources (Röling 1997). In the 

contemporary development discourse natural resources are usually perceived as 

hard, 5 objectively fixed, bio-physical facts (e.g., soil, crops, livestock, disease and 

5 Röling (1997) illustrates the notion of soft and hard science in natural resource 

management in his commonly used term “Soft Side of Land Perspective’. It is 

important to look beyond the common categorisation of social science as soft 

science and technical science (biophysical) as hard science. It implies that positivist 

and constructivist thinking exists within both sciences. For example, even within 

- 80 –


2004 – nr. 50 

pests, water, yields, erosion, caring capacity, bio-diversity, physical properties) 

Such factors as human goals, organisation and technological aspects (Röling 2000) 

are usually ignored. But conflict concerning natural resources is the outcome of 

societal arrangement, human intention and behaviour (Röling 1997) framed within 

those biophysical properties. Therefore, both of these dimensions of natural 

resources are essential for a better understanding of conflicts in natural resource 

management. Resource management decisions and the activities of resource users, 

the performance of bureaucracy, the functioning of user groups and associations, 

access to and control over resources, customary practices and state 

laws/regulations, livelihood requirements and the welfare of people are therefore 

important issues to be addressed in any study of conflict. 

In Nepal the dominant development paradigm still treats technology as a ‘black 

box’ and gives little attention to human intentions and behaviour in managing 

natural resources. Responsive institutions, collective learning, negotiation and 

concerted actions in my opinion are vital but neglected components in natural 

resource management discourses and practices. Several researchers and academics 

(for example, Röling 1997; Pradhan et al. 2000; Uphoff 2000, Chambers 1988) 

have shown that natural resource management is not only a technical domain, but 

that it is more importantly a social discourse, shaped and influenced by social 

processes and intentional human activities. A plural legal situation can create 

several conflicts because of its uncertain and manipulative nature. Most of the 

legal reforms related to natural resources have yet to be translated into real 

practices. If and when they are practised, power brokers manipulate them and the 

weaker section of society still feels uncertain and insecure. 

During my twenty-five years of practical experience in the rural development, 

natural resource management and environmental sectors, I have increasingly 

realised that a government’s policies and a donor’s strategies are more focused on 

management and control of natural resources through prescriptive technical 

solutions than through a meaningful participation of people. This leads to conflict 

and disturbance in the self-regulated use of ecological systems. We are now 

entering the twenty-first century, where conflict between economic objectives and 

the social sciences there are both positivist thinking, such as the resolution of 

conflict by enforcing acts and regulations and use of the courts and police, and 

constructivist thinking such as the resolution of conflict through learning, 

negotiation and collaboration. 

- 81 –



____________________________________________________________________ 

sustainable ecological use of natural resources is accelerating. Obviously the 

increasing problems such as the lack of pure drinking water, loss of bio-diversity, 

climate change, environment pollution and other ecological challenges are the 

product of increasingly developed consumerism, population pressure, economic 

motives and governance failure. These problems are not only disrupting selfsustaining 

NR systems but also creating severe conflicts in society. Therefore, an 

economically guided focus for these problems is in itself a source of further 

conflict. 

3.1 Case one: mis-governance in a donor-funded irrigation system 

In 1982 a local leader requested the Department of Irrigation (DOI) to construct an 

irrigation canal. The DOI conducted a survey but did not proceed any further. This 

project came into the light again when a District Irrigation Office (DIO) was 

established in Dolakha district in 1989. An active local political worker 

(hereinafter referred as the initiator), who was also a professional contractor, by 

using his ‘relation of special intimacy’ 6 (Wade 1982) with engineers initiated this 

project. The DIO Engineer approved the project within the provisions of the Asian 

Development Bank (ADB) funded Irrigation Sector Support Project (ISSP). 

Difficulties started when the local people discovered that the proposed alignment 

of the canal had been changed. 7 A Water Users Committee (WUC) was formed 

without informing villagers and they elected chairmen of the two Village 

Development Committees (VDCs) of the command area of the canal. So the 

conflict became more serious and the public started to oppose the activities of the 

WUC. Users of the canals downstream raised the issue of water scarcity. As a 

consequence, the disgruntled people lodged a complaint to the District 

Administration Office to stop the construction. The Chief District Officer 

organised meetings with both groups and an agreement was reached with the 

following provisions: 

(a) 

sharing of water with downstream canals, 

6 Bargaining for a bribe between contractor and engineer is more direct and 

surreptitious in the developed relation of special intimacy (Wade 1982). 

7 According to the respondents the motive for the change of alignment of the canal 

was to increase the total cost of the project. 

- 82 –


2004 – nr. 50 

(b) 

(c) 

sharing of power by reorganising the existing WUC of the 

project, and 

sharing of construction work and budget by users. 

Accordingly, the existing 11-member WUC was expanded to 19 members. The 

newly expanded WUC divided the total construction work into 35 sections and 

allocated these to WUC members and their supporters. However, 85% of the 

people that obtained construction contracts were not beneficiaries of the project. 

Therefore they were not much interested in constructing a canal of good quality, 

and did not use the proper ratio of cement to concrete, nor quality construction 

materials, seeking to save money on the ground. Most of the people who got 

contracts were either WUC members themselves or their close relatives and 

supporters. 

The technology used in the project was expensive and complicated. The irrigation 

technicians, in consultation with the WUC used cemented structures, masonry, 

gabion wire etc. to raise the cost of the project, as this gave ample scope to get 

commissions while purchasing, and they could save a huge amount out of the 

transportation cost of the construction materials. The quality of work was poor 

because they were not using construction materials according to the standard norm, 

in order to save money (Upreti 2001), doing what Wade (1982) describes as 

‘saving in the ground’ and Thapa (2002) and Panday (2001) describe as 

‘corruption’. In this way, full of conflicts and tension the project was officially 

completed in 1996. Today only the canal track remains and the WUC is 

completely dysfunctional. The villagers filed a case for corruption against the 

WUC in 1995. This was dismissed by a Special Police Investigation in the same 

year. Local people blamed that the alleged offer by the WUC of a bribe to dismiss 

the case (Upreti 2001). This type of manipulation and corruption is not new in the 

development programme in Nepal (Panday 2001; Thapa 2002). In this context, 

Hari Bahadur Thapa has made a thorough analysis of Nepalese corruption in his 

recent book entitled Anatomy of Corruption. He writes: 

Corruption has flourished because of lack of strong political will 

to control it. Nepal's political leadership has been more 

concerned with its own party political interests than the welfare 

of the nation (Thapa 2002: iv). 

- 83 –



____________________________________________________________________ 

3.2 Case two: conflict between the farmers of an irrigation system 

A deep conflict was observed over an irrigation system when the government 

expanded the existing canal in Pawoti village of Dolakha District. In consequence 

of this work the existing rules and regulations were replaced, water scarcity was 

observed and tension between different farmers and between the farmers and the 

irrigation authority mounted. Before the external intervention irrigation conflicts 

had been resolved by users themselves using locally developed rules and 

procedures. Water sharing and maintenance of the canal was effective. Afterwards 

people were unhappy with the misuse of money received from the government and 

stopped contributing their volunteer labour to maintain the canal. The conflict 

became very serious and generally tail-end farmers were not allowed to take water. 

These farmers approached the local authority, district irrigation offices, and the 

district administration but the conflict was not resolved because the government 

authority was not willing to solve the problem. Instead, the conflict became 

increasingly politicised, the canal became dysfunctional and the villagers fell in to 

deep conflict. The main causes of this conflict were ignorance of the rules 

developed and enforced by the community, and of the voice of local people, and 

the ineffective role of the government organisations responsible for addressing 

conflict. 

3.3 Case three: conflict between the village elite and the local people in a 

pastureland 

Access and control of the pastureland located in Ward 7 of the Pawoti VDC was 

the main cause of this conflict. Local elite and powerbrokers started to terrace the 

centuries-old communally managed public pastureland. Being powerful politicians 

of high economic status and with strong network connections with bureaucrats, the 

pastureland invaders seriously undermined the symbolic and economic attachment 

of the local community to this land. When the users started to protest against the 

invasion the conflict escalated. Local efforts over several years failed to resolve 

the conflict. Ultimately, the case reached the senior government administrator. The 

administrator decided in favour of the community but the invaders did not leave 

the invaded land. The community members appealed for the execution of the 

earlier decision, but the power and influence of the powerbrokers prevented an 

effective enforcement of the decision and the appeal was dismissed. The legal 

procedure was too complicated and expensive for the community. Therefore, they 

did not go for further legal remedies. The conflict continues and the society is 

- 84 –


2004 – nr. 50 

divided. 

3.4 Case four: conflict between two communities over a spring water source 

A serious conflict between two communities over the sharing of water from a 

spring was observed in Pawoti VDC. The existing water users were not prepared 

to share this water source. They claimed that there would be a problem of scarcity 

of water to irrigate their fields if they shared the source with another community. 

The case went to the government’s district office but was not settled. It was 

politicised by the district politicians influencing the government bureaucrats. So 

the conflict remained unsettled for several years. Later, with the help of a local 

priest, a women’s leader and a local NGO, the conflict was resolved with the 

following provisions: 

1. the new users should construct a reservoir tank close to 

the source and collect water at night time; 

2. in case of water shortage during rice transplanting, water 

should not be collected in the reservoir tank during that 

time; 

3. the new users should take responsibility for the 

conservation of the source; 

4. the existing users should inform the new users before 

letting the water flow out for rice transplanting; 

5. both groups should apologise for past accusations and 

misunderstandings; and 

6. if problems emerged, the users would have to call a 

meeting to find ways to resolve them. 

This proposal was thoroughly discussed in successive meetings with the existing 

users, staff of the NGO, other villagers and the new users. They used their past 

experiences, learnt from their mistakes, and worked collectively to settle the 

conflict. In this way the serious conflict, which could not be solved by the 

government agency, was solved at local level with win-win outcome. 

3.5 Case five: conflict between the landlords and the tenants in agricultural lands 

A deep-seated conflict between the 123 tenant households and 50 landlords of the 

- 85 –



____________________________________________________________________ 

Deurali village of the Pawoti VDC was resolved after 39 years through several 

efforts at different levels. The landlords had been a rich and powerful ruling elite 

in the village for several generations. So they were not ready to accept the 

demands for tenants’ rights from their tenants. The tenant farmers made all 

possible local efforts to establish their rights over the land. They mobilised local 

priests, relatives of landlords, and themselves approached the landowners to 

engage in negotiation, but these efforts did not work. They also paid the price of 

the land to the landowners to induce them to transfer the land. But the landlords 

did not transfer the land ownership. Because of the complicated nature of the legal 

procedure, high fees and the potential fear that the decision would go against them 

because of the influence of power and money, the tenants did not opt for a legal 

battle. Instead they stopped paying the rent. Then the landlords filed a case against 

them. The governmental organisations responsible for dealing with land conflicts 

gave a verdict in favour of the landlords. The tenants did not accept the decision 

and continued with their claim. The tenants were strongly organised, learnt from 

past mistakes while dealing with landowners, discussed their problems with other 

people in the village, and won the support of all villagers. The determination and 

concerted actions of the tenants forced the landowners to rethink the issue. The 

landlords realised that the solution of evicting them from the land would not work. 

If the tenants were evicted they would be landless and create severe problems and 

even pose a risk of physical insecurity to the landlords. Finally the landowners 

transferred the ownership rights to the tenants and the tenants paid 100,000 rupees 

in return. Then the conflict was resolved locally in a win-win situation. 

4. A Framework for Resource Governance and its Legal Dimensions 

I define resource governance as a set of policies, laws and regulations, institutions, 

technologies and cognitive aspects like values, perceptions, understanding and 

actions, through which people manage (conserve and utilise) natural resources in a 

transparent, accountable, participatory and equitable manner. Generally resource 

governance covers: 

• setting broad objectives, 

• planning for specific targets, and framing policies to 

attain those targets, 

• selecting specific policy instruments, 

• establishing institutional mechanisms to implement them, 

and 

- 86 –


2004 – nr. 50 

• adopting appropriate approaches for involvement and 

empowerment of stakeholders. 

All these elements give rise to conflict if not handled properly. This dimension is 

discussed in detail in this section. Conflicts in Nepal over lands, water and forests 

are given an analysis in this section based on the concept of resource governance 

systems. 

Figure 1. Interrelationship between components of environmental governance 

Though weak in their implementation, several international efforts have been made 

in environmental governance. Nepal is a signatory of more than 22 Multilateral 

Environmental Agreements (MEAs) (Silwal and Prasad 2002) and works within 

international guiding principles and frameworks. 

His Majesty’s Government of Nepal uses general policy documents like Periodic 

Five Year Plans, the National Conservation Strategy (NCS) 1988, the EIA 

Guidelines 1993/1997, the Nepal Environmental Policy and Action Plan (NEPAP I 

1995 and II 1996), the Sustainable Development Agenda of Nepal (SDAN) 2002, 

and sectoral policy documents like the Agriculture Perspective Plan (APP), the 

Hydropower Development Policy 1992/2002, the Forestry Policy 1992, the 

Industrial Policy 1992, Nepal Environmental Health Initiatives (NEHI) 1997, and 

- 87 –



____________________________________________________________________ 

the Cleaner Production Policy 2001 (Silwal and Prasad 2002) to facilitate 

environmental governance practice. 

In Part 4, Article 26 (State Policies) of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 

1990 stipulates: 

(3) The State shall pursue a policy of mobilizing the natural 

resources and heritage of the country in manner, which might be 

useful and beneficial to the interest of the nation; 

(4) The State shall give priority to the protection of the 

environment and also to the prevention of its further damage due 

to physical development activities by increasing the awareness of 

the general public about environmental cleanliness, and the State 

shall also make arrangements for the special protection of the 

rare wildlife, the forest and the vegetation. 

To meet the constitutional requirement there are two specific enactments, i.e., the 

Environmental Protection Act (EPA) 1997 and the Environmental Protection 

Regulations (EPR) 1998. These two provisions govern access to environmental 

services. In addition to that there are other acts supporting environmental 

governance (Box 2). 

In addition to these provisions there are also some other important provisions such 

as the Parliamentary Council for Conservation of Natural & Cultural Resources 

(CCNCR), the Environment Conservation Council, the Parliament, National 

Planning Commission (NPC), Environment Protection Council (EPC), Water and 

Energy Commission (WEC), etc. (Silwal and Prasad, 2002). 

- 88 –


2004 – nr. 50 

Box 2 

Acts and Laws 

Agriculture related: Pesticide Act 

1992/Rules 1994; Livestock Health 

and Service Act, 1998 /Rules 1999; 

Seed Act, 1989/ Rules, 1996; Food 

Act, 1967; Aquatic Animals 

Protection Act, 1961. 

Land related: Land Act, 1964; Land 

(Measurement) Act, 1963; Land 

Revenue Act, 1979; Land and 

Watershed Protection Act, 1983; Soil 

and Water Conservation Act, 1992. 

Air related: Vehicular and 

Transport Management Act, 1992. 

Forest related: Forest Act, 1993. 

Water related: Water Resources Act, 

1992; Electricity Act, 1992. 

Industry related: Industrial 

Management Act, 1992; Industrial 

Enterprise Act, 1992; Labor Act, 1991. 

Local Self Governance Act (LSGA), 1999. The LSGA provides more 

autonomy to Village Development Committees (VDCs), District Development 

Committees (DDCs) and Municipalities by empowering the local authorities to 

manage natural resources, and guides them to integrate environmental resources 

and environmental planning (Part V, 5.3). Some of the highlights that pertain to 

environmental governance are: 

wards are required to help in the protection of the environment through 

plantations (Section 25[e]); 

rights and duties of the VDCs are stipulated (Section 28) 

VDCs are empowered to levy taxes on utilization of natural resources 

(Section 55); 

property of VDCs, i.e. natural resources, are listed (Section 68) 

powers are provided to formulate and implement plans for the conservation 

of forest, vegetation, biological diversity and soil (Section 189); 

power is given to formulate bylaws in the area of management of all the 

natural resources i.e. air, water, land and forest. 

Source: Silwal and Prasad 2002. 

- 89 –



____________________________________________________________________ 

5. Political Economy of Natural Resources in Nepal 

Political economy refers to the public power or decision-making over access to and 

control over resources. The basic questions are, who gains, who loses, who has 

control, and how? In discussing the political economy of natural resources it is 

important to examine how politics function in a particular social setting. In the 

agrarian society of Nepal people use the land, but the true owner is the state and a 

feudalistic mode of production exists. Society is not a mere sum of individual acts, 

but rather a complex totality of interacting individuals tied up with specific social 

and economic relationships and interdependent structures. Individuals in society 

are embedded in particular class relationships and class interests. Political life is an 

expression of dependency and state domination. The elite, particularly the formal 

power holders, have an interest in maintaining such a dependent structure so as to 

gain the most advantage from the system for themselves. This is truly reflected in 

Nepalese rural societies where there are hierarchies of chains of relationships, 

which have an exploitative structure. There is a formal power structure that is 

represented by the elite at different levels. At the political level there are the top 

civil servants, businessmen, religious leaders, etc. At the local level these elites 

advance their interests through power. They share certain common ideologies and 

political positions, values and perspectives and act accordingly to maintain the 

existing mode of resource management and utilisation. Investment of resources in 

development is organised accordingly. 

The history of the Nepalese political economy of natural resources shows that prior 

to 1734, when the present-day Nepal was a fragmented groups of petty states, 

people were deliberately encouraged to cultivate as much forest and pasture land as 

possible. This ensured them a good living and increased the productivity of the 

land. They then paid a certain portion of their returns to the state (Regmi 1978). 

Until 1950 it was common for the state to grant tax-free land to officials, religious 

organisations and individual favourites of the kings or rulers. Traditionally land 

was considered as the property of the state [state landlordism] and this land is 

called Raikar 8 . Only the state had the right to alienate land through sale, mortgage 

8 M.C. Regmi argues that there were mainly two types of land tenure system in 

Nepal, i.e., Raikar and Kipat. All other tenured forms of land were derived from 

Raikar (Regmi 1976, 1978). The meaning of Raikar land has changed since 1951, 

from crown land to land owned by individuals. Raikar-land ownership denotes an 

- 90 –


2004 – nr. 50 

or bequest (Regmi 1976). Using this right of alienation the state granted cultivated 

or uncultivated state-owned Raikar lands to individuals in the form of Jagir, Birta, 

Rakam, Sera and Rajya, and charitable or religious organisations in the form of 

Guthi (Regmi 1976). 9 The Guthi land tenure system also included the endowment 

of private lands (obtained from the state) by individual landlords for religious 

ultimate state ownership over those lands, which were actually cultivated by 

individuals as direct tenants of the state. The tenancy of Rraikar land has two 

categories, the actual tenant-cultivators and the tenant owners. The latter category 

of tenants are those who pay rent to the state, but who can sell or bequeath their 

Raikar land, whereas the former category (the tenant cultivators) have no right to 

sell sublet or otherwise alienate the land which has been allotted to them. The 

usufructuary assignment of Raikar land to individuals and institutions is a 

deliberate means of rewarding them and ensuring their loyalty, paying them for 

services rendered and promoting social and religious activities. The Raikar land 

grant was practised in several forms viz.: Birta, Jagir and Guthi, Rakam, Rajya, 

and Sera. 

9 A Birta grant was given to a noble as a reward for a service rendered to the state. 

It had no time limits and it could be rented out or inherited until confiscated or 

recalled by the state. Birta owners usually had full rights to possess, occupy, sell, 

lease, subdivide and bequeath their lands. Most Birta lands were not taxable. They 

have become the foundation of the modern, private landed property arrangement. 

Jagir land holding was more conditional and subtle and often granted to 

government servants rather than to members of the ruling elite. A Jagir assessment 

was usually an assignment of the income from Raikar lands in lieu of a salary and 

it could not be assigned or sold. Jagir rights lapsed on the cesser of employment, 

or at the discretion of the government. The Birta and Jagir forms were abolished 

in 1959, with the enactment of the Birta Abolition Act and were converted to 

Raikar land (New Era 1988: 28-31). Sera was a form of land tenure explicitly used 

by the royal palace to meet the food-grain and other land-related requirements. 

Rakam is another form of land tenure where cultivators have to compulsorily 

provide unpaid labourers to the government as carpenters, masons, and postmen. 

Rajya was another modified form of land tenure granted as the princely state 

award for members and relatives of Royal families. This land-granting practice 

was common, up until the Rana regime. Rulers granted large portion of lands to 

soldiers as Jagir to keep them under their control. Rana rulers confined the landgrant 

practices to their relatives and key officials. 

- 91 –



____________________________________________________________________ 

purposes. Kipat 10 was another communal land-tenure system whereby individuals 

derived land rights from their association with particular ethnic groups, located in 

a particular area. Regmi states that “individuals who cultivated land in their 

capacity as a member of a Kipat-owing ethnic group owed allegiance primarily to 

the community, not to the state” (Regmi 1972: 27). 

Almost one-third of agricultural and forest land of the nation was granted to 

private individuals by 1950 and the remainder belongs to Rana (members of the 

ruling clan) themselves (Regmi 1978). Local functionaries, all favourites of Rana, 

implemented the land-grant policy in the villages and were able to assure most 

benefit for themselves. They obtained a great deal of land from the state through 

Jagir and Birta grants and rented these lands to peasant farmers under tenancy 

arrangements. In this way local functionaries turned into landlords. Peasant 

farmers had to pay half of their crop yield as rent to the local landlords. Gradually, 

to ensure their rent, landlords introduced the kut (contract) system where only 

those tenants who were able to pay high rents could get a contract. Irrespective of 

the performance of their crops, even if the crops failed, farmers had to pay rent as 

Kut. Eventually these peasant farmers effectively turned into slave labourers of the 

Jagir and Birta holders (Regmi 1978). After 1951 the government nationalised all 

the forest in Nepal so as to release land from the grip of Birta holders, especially 

from Rana families. However, this did not function well in practice. Historically 

land resources in Nepal played a crucial role in socio-economic and political 

change and were used by principalities and national governments for their political 

goals. 

Large portions of all these forms of land tenure were cultivated under tenancy 

arrangements, in the form of sharecropping. Some landlords were entrusted by the 

government as Mukhiya in the Hill regions and Chaudhari and Jimidar in Terai 

regions to work on land administration (Pradhan et al. 2000). They had the 

authority to establish settlements in new areas, and to collect tax and pay part of it 

to government (Regmi 1976). The emergence of a unified nation was the outcome 

of the consolidation of small kingdoms, fiefdoms and principalities. The state 

began to regulate the available natural resources to generate government revenue. 

10 This was an ancient type of communal land tenure where an ethnic community 

was granted land by their king in recognition of a traditional communal tenure. 

Headmen had the authority to grant individuals the right to cultivate certain areas 

and to collect forest products from other areas (Regmi 1978) 

- 92 –


2004 – nr. 50 

This led to the establishment of control mechanisms: different departments and 

regional offices, policies, acts, rules and regulations to control systematically the 

available natural resources. It can be seen from the above brief history of land 

tenure systems in Nepal that the rulers used land as a means of maintaining 

functionaries for the consolidation of power and maintaining good relations with 

family members, close allies, members of the nobility, military personnel, civil 

employees, royal courtiers and potential foes. The mode of production in and 

distribution of natural resources was very much feudalistic in nature. 

In the history of Nepalese development (especially between 1951 and 2000), 

development intervention as a means of agrarian change has had three 

complementary objectives: (i) to raise production and productivity, (ii) to raise 

livelihood, 11 and (iii) to sustain the existing natural resource base. The emphasis 

given in national policies and planning (in, for example, the Ninth Five Year Plan 

(NFYP), and the Nepal Agriculture Perspective Plan (APP)) was to increase 

production, achieve a trade balance and increase employment opportunities in the 

natural resource sector; and enhance national economic growth by effectively 

utilising the available natural resources. However, the performance level of such 

intervention in alleviating poverty in Nepal has not yet reached expectations. There 

is evidence that productivity-oriented achievements are not fully able to address 

problems such as the widening gap between rich and poor, unemployment, and 

degradation of the natural resource base. These problems are not only creating 

inequality but are also creating fundamental conflict between the rich and the poor. 

The growing Maoist movement in Nepal is an example of such conflict. The 

implications of such conflicts are long term and are dividing society, and 

disrupting social harmony and cohesion. In this context Chambers explains that 

“the problem of poverty in South Asia at least is not now a problem of production, 

or of food availability: it is a problem of who produces the food and of who has 

power to obtain it” (Chambers 1988:7). 

11 Chambers (1988) explained the first and second objectives in detail in the 

context of South Asia. According to him livelihood thinking “is assessed in terms 

of the adequate and secured livelihoods it generates and sustains, putting 

antipoverty efforts, and people, before production per se”( Chambers 1988: 7). 

- 93 –



____________________________________________________________________ 

Box 3 

Impacts of Development Intervention in Conflict 

Mohan Mainali has severely questioned the contribution and effectiveness of donor 

funded development intervention to address the root causes of the conflict. He 

writes: 

… What we say of the USAID implemented Rapti Zone Rural 

Area Dec Project, and its second incarnation, the Rapti 

Development Project, aimed to fulfil the basic needs of the poor 

majority, the farmers of the mid hills. The Programme spent 

about US$ 50m in “improving household food production and 

consumption, improving income generating opportunities for 

poor farmers, landless labourers, occupational castes and 

women”. In short, the project’s overall goal was to increase the 

well-being of people. The Americans thought they’d need 15 

years to achieve their objectives. And, going by their reports, 

they worked ‘hard’ for those 15 years. The project started in 

1980 and ended in 1995, just a month and a half before the 

Maoists began their armed movement…. The government and 

donors both say development packages will help eliminate the 

Maoists. If that were true, why was Rapti Zone so favourable for 

the development of Maoist movement? If that is what you get 

after 15 years of American funded development, we were 

perhaps better without it. (Mainali 2003: 125-126) 

6. The Denial Psyche in Nepalese Conflict: 

The denial psyche is a unique characteristic of Nepalese society. Nobody is ready 

to acknowledge their own weaknesses in addressing the current conflict. 

Parliamentary parties are not ready to accept their failure as one of the main causes 

of the conflict. The government is not ready to accept the fact did not take correct 

approach to address this conflict; the rebels are not ready to accept that the general 

public want peace and not the violence. They are all denying that all of them are 

equally responsible for the escalation of this conflict. Bureaucracy denies its 

- 94 –


2004 – nr. 50 

failure, the NGO sector denies its malpractices in the name of development. The 

business community denies the very fact that businessmen are among the top 

promoters of corruption in this country. The donor community denies their failure 

to support development in this country. Professionals deny their professional 

failure. So all major actors deny the reality and their own weakness and put the 

blame on others and shift the responsibilities onto others. 

Box 4 

Paradox of Conflict 

Paradoxically empowerment led to conflict in Nepal. A plausible explanation of 

the emergence of the Maoist conflict in a particular time is the growing awareness 

and empowerment of the Nepalese people during the initial years of multiparty 

democracy. People have become more aware of poverty, inequality, 

discrimination, corruption and lack of employment opportunities. They are 

empowered to raise their voices against injustice, poverty and social exclusion. 

Therefore, paradoxically the current crisis is not only the syndrome of system 

failure but also an indicator of social awareness and people’s empowerment. 

Multiparty democracy gave ample opportunities for different categories of people 

to organise, to form organisations to fight for their rights, and these helped 

tremendously to empower people. 

The individual and collective political psyche has so far preferred to ignore reality 

rather than to face challenges that are threatening Nepali democracy. A powerful 

defence mechanism, used by politicians and power centres alike, is denial. They 

deny the seriousness of the current situation, afraid to admit that their prevailing 

attitudes and practices are inappropriate and causing problems. They feel even 

more obstinately defensive when Nepali people confront them with evidence that 

their actions need to change. In Nepal denial is rooted in the individual and 

institutional level in politics, in political parties, in government departments, and 

in other power centres. The difficulty of overcoming this magnitude of denial by 

democratic reform should not be underestimated. It is necessary to replace the 

ideas, values, greed and orthodoxy that underlie formidable and complex obstacles 

with a new set of ideas and values. If this paradigm shift is accepted as inevitable, 

the current conflict may be a great opportunity for fundamental reform of Nepali 

society. 

- 95 –



____________________________________________________________________ 

Box 5 

The Nepalese Crisis is a Complex Mix of Everything 

Acute inequalities, absolute poverty, lack of access to resources and the failure of 

political structures to address these issues, have made Nepali society extremely 

vulnerable to conflict and mass movements like the Maoists’ ‘people’s war’. 

Several examples from Peru, Chile, Mozambique, India, Nicaragua, Tanzania, 

Senegal and Columbia show that resistance from below is obvious and predictable 

if the state is not responsive to basic concerns of the rural poor. Deep rooted social 

cleavages in terms of caste, ethnicity, gender and regional, cultural, linguistic and 

religious forms of discrimination provided fertile ground for conflict to escalate. 

The Maoists successfully capitalised on the highly unsatisfactory democratic 

transition of 1990. The people of Nepal are deeply disillusioned by the poor 

performance of current political structures and processes. The dominance of 

certain groups in all social, political and economic sectors has bred strong feelings 

of injustice and revenge, as the socially marginalised people strongly believe that 

they have been excluded from opportunities and resources. The Maoists have 

tactically exploited this resentment. The emergence of ethnic interest groups, and 

increased awareness of social exclusion and ethnic inequalities and governance 

failure further fuelled the conflict. 

7. Conclusion 

The raising of productivity 12 still dominates thinking in Nepal. Environmental 

governance is not getting the required attention in the broader national governance 

system. Resource use and environmental services are taken for granted. The severe 

implications of resource scarcity and disruption of fundamental ecological 

processes are either not internalised or deliberately ignored in a realm of growing 

consumerism and the economically driven profit-making motive. Natural resources 

12 Both the Ninth Five-Year Plan and the Agriculture Perspective Plan focused 

exclusively on economic growth of the agricultural sector through effective natural 

resource management. 

- 96 –


2004 – nr. 50 

have strong and diverse impacts on different categories of people such as landless 

farmers, wage labourers, tenant farmers, women, landlords and powerful elites. 

The sustainable contribution of natural resource management in reducing the 

vulnerability of impoverished people, sustaining ecological services from natural 

resources, stabilising social mobility and improving the quality of life of the rural 

poor is yet to materialise. Conflict mitigation and the addressing of environmental 

scarcity are beyond the dominant development paradigm. Sustainable use and 

management of natural resources can only take place through a strong political 

commitment, clear vision, fair and responsive administration, protection from 

malpractice such as rent-seeking (Wade 1982), expansion of institutional 

understanding (Ostrom 1990), and the embrace of collective learning and 

concerted action (Röling and Wagemakers 1998). These crucial elements of 

environmental governance are severely lacking at present. The economic 

transformation of the more than 49%of Nepalese people who are below the 

poverty line is still more wishful thinking than a reality. In contemporary Nepal 

ethics and responsibility (providing basic livelihoods to the burgeoning population) 

do not drive natural resource management objectives, but rather they are driven by 

the drive towards the accumulation of wealth and power. 

References 

BECK, Ulrich, Anthony GIDDENS and S. LAS (eds.) 

1994 Reflective Modernisation: Politics Tradition and Aesthetics in Modern 

Social Order. Cambridge: Polity Press. 

BUCKLES, D. (ed.) 

1999 Cultivating Peace: Conflict and Collaboration in Natural Resource 

Management. Ottawa/Washington: IDRC/ World Bank Institute. 

CBS (Central Bureau of Statistics) 

1995 Statistical Year Book of Nepal 1995. Kathmandu: Central Bureau of 

Statistics. 

CHAMBERS R. 

1988 Managing Canal Irrigation: Practical Analysis from South Asia. New 

Delhi: Oxford University Press. 

DANIELS, Steven E. and Gregg B. WALKER 

1997 ‘Rethinking public participation in natural resource management: concepts 

from pluralism and five emerging approaches.’ Pp. 29-48 in Pluralism 

and Sustainable Forestry and Rural Development, Proceedings of an 

- 97 –



____________________________________________________________________ 

International Workshop, 9-12 December, 1997. Rome: FAO. 

ENGEL, P.G.H. and S.M.L. SALOMON (eds.) 

1997 Facilitating Innovation for Development: A RAAKS Resource Guide. 

Amsterdam: KIT Press. 

GHIMIRE, K. 

1992 Forest or Farm? The Politics of Poverty and Land Hunger in Nepal. 

Delhi: Oxford University Press. 

HMG/N (His Majesty’s Government of Nepal) 

1992 National Report on United Nations Conference on Environment and 

Development. Kathmandu: His Majesty’s Government of Nepal. 

IDRIS S.M.M. 

1998 Why? Why? Why...? Half of the Sky: The Struggle of the Women in the 

Third World. Malaysia: The Third World Resource. No 94. 1998. 

JHPIP (Johns Hopkins Population Information Programme) 

1998 World Report of Johns Hopkins Population Information Programme. 

Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Population Information Programme. 

LUBCHENCO J. 

1998 ‘Entering the century of environment: A new social contract for science.’ 

Science 279: 491-496. 

MAINALI M, 

2003 ‘Development vs the Maobadies.’ Pp. 125-127 in: D. Thapa (ed.), 

Understanding the Maoist Movement in Nepal. Kathmandu: Martin 

Chautari. 

NEW ERA 

1988 A Study of Legal System and Legal Situation in Rural Areas of the 

Kingdom of Nepal. Kathmandu: Friedirich Naumann Foundation. 

NPC (National Planning Commission) 

1998 Ninth Plan 1997-2002. Kathmandu: National Planning Commission. 

OHLSSON L. (ed.) 

1995 Hydropolitics: Conflict over Water as Development Constraints. London 

and New Jersey: ZED Books. 

OLI, K.P. 

1998 Conflict Resolution and Mediation in Natural Resource Management. 

Kathmandu: IUCN-Nepal. 

OSTROM E. 

1990 Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective 

Actions. New York: Cambridge University Press. 

PANDAY, D.R. 

2001 Corruption, governance and international co-operation: essays and 

- 98 –


2004 – nr. 50 

impressions on Nepal and South Asia. Kathmandu: Transparency 

International Nepal. 

PRADHAN, R., F. von BENDA-BECKMANN and K. von BENDA- 

BECKMANN (eds.) 

2000 Water Land and Laws: Changing Rights to Land and Water in Nepal. 

Kathmandu: FREEDEAL. 

REGMI, M.C. 

1972 A Study of Nepali Economic History 1768-1846. Delhi: Adroit Publishers. 

1976 Land Ownership in Nepal. Berkeley: University of California Press. 

1978 Land Tenure and Taxation in Nepal. Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak Bhandar. 

RÖLING, N. 

1997 ‘The soft side of land.’ ITC Journal 3 and 4, Special Congress Issue: 248- 

262. 

2000 Gateway to the Global Garden: Beta/Gamma Science for Dealing with 

Ecological Rationality. Eighth Annual Hopper Lecture October 24, 2000. 

University of Guelph, Canada. 

RÖLING, N. and A. WAGEMAKERS (eds.) 

1998 Facilitating Sustainable Agriculture. Cambridge: Cambridge University 

Press. 

SHRESTHA, N.R. 

1997 In the Name of Development: A Reflection in Nepal. Kathmandu: 

Educational Enterprise. 

SILWAL, P.K. and H. PRASAD 

2002 Environmental Governance: AQ Manual for Local Authorities in Nepal. 

Kathmandu: UNDP. 

TEAR FUND 

1999 ‘Looking after our land.’ Footsteps 41 (Dec.) Teddington: Tear Fund. 

THAPA, H.B. 

2002 Anatomy of Corruption. Kathmandu: Published by Sangita Thapa. 

UPHOFF, N. 

2000 ‘Understanding social capital: learning from the analysis and experience 

of Participation. HLR: http://www.sls.wau.nl/mi/Education/index.html, 

circulated for a group presentation on Wednesday 13 September 2000, 

Wageningen. 

UPRETI, B.R. 

1999 ‘Managing local conflicts over water resources: A case study from 

Nepal.’ AgREN, ODI Network Paper No 95, July. London: Overseas 

Development Institute. 

2000a ‘Beyond rhetorical success: advancing the potential for the Nepalese 

- 99 –



____________________________________________________________________ 

community forestry programme to address equity concerns.’ In: E. 

Wollenberg, D. Edmunds, L. Buck, J. Fox and S. Brodt (eds.), Social 

Learning in Community Forest Management: Linking Concept and 

Practice, a Joint Publication of CIFOR and the East-West Centre. 

2000b ‘Community level water use negotiation practice: an implication for water 

resource management.’ Pp. 249-269 in: R. Pradhan, F. von Benda- 

Beckmann and K. von Benda-Beckmann (eds.). 

2000c The effects of changing land use systems in agricultural biodiversity: 

experiences and lessons from Nepal.’ Pp. 327-337 in: Xu Jianchu (Ed.) 

Links Between the Culture and Biodiversity, Proceedings of the Culture 

and Biodiversity Congress, 20-30 July, Cunming, Yunnan, China, 21-30 

July 2000. Yunnan Science and Technology. 

2001 Conflict Management in Natural Resources: A Study of Land, Water and 

Forest Conflict in Nepal. Published PhD Dissertation. Wagenignen 

University. 

2002 Management of Social and Natural Resource Conflict in Nepal: Reality 

and Alternative. Adroit Publishers, New Delhi. 

2003 ‘Environmental governance to address resource scarcity and conflict in 

Nepal.’ Paper presented at Environmental Conflict Resolution: A Right 

Based Approach, organised by Environmental Law Committee of Nepal 

Bar Association, Kathmandu, 7th June. 

2004 The price of Neglect: Resources Conflict to Maoist Insurgency in the 

Himalayan Kingdom. Kathmandu: Bhrikuti Publishers. 

WADE R. 

1982 ‘The study of administrative and political corruption: canal irrigation in 

south India.’ Journal of Development Studies 18: 287-328. 

WALKER G.B. and S.E. DANIELS 

1997 ‘Foundations of natural resource conflict: conflict theory and public 

policy. Pp. 13-36 in: B. Solberg and S. Miina (eds.), Conflict 

Management and Public Participation in Land Management, EFT 

Proceeding No 14. European Forest Institute. 

WARNER, M. and P. JONES 

1998 ‘Assessing the need to manage conflict in community based natural 

resource project.’ Natural Resource Perspective 35 (Aug.) London: 

Overseas Development Institute. 

WORLD WATER FORUM 

2000 A Vision of Water for Food and Rural Development. The Hague: World 

Water Council. 

- 100 –

relationships between resource governance and resource conflict

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?